The conductor vs. the orchestra

I don’t know how much all of this “conductor’s role” is a mystery to non-performers and how much is pretty clear, but I remember an uncle once asking, What does a conductor do? Isn’t it all written down? I explained that someone had to stop and start them, and he seemed perfectly satisfied with that. (Did I mention most of my extended family is not musical?)

Working with an orchestra is different from working with a chorus, mainly because you get 5-10 weeks with a chorus and two rehearsals with an orchestra (if you are lucky enough to get two). And orchestras are trained differently. For instance, they spend years playing scales to get to this level, most of them are making their living at this, and their violins never catch cold or are susceptible to allergy season. And any two violins you pick up will sound more similar than any two sopranos.

But let’s not confuse training with musicianship! Warning: soapbox approaching. My wife, the dear, sweet Paigely, hates when I get on my soapbox and talk about getting better gas mileage and recycling everything you’ve ever touched and building schools in Afghanistan (see earlier blogs!) but this one she might accept.

There are those who, when intending to refer to “singers and instrumentalists,” make the grievous error of saying “singers and musicians,” as if singers are not musicians also. Don’t ever let me or my wife hear you say this! [I once had an email run-in with a local media celebrity who could not understand this distinction. It would be like saying to Rex Smith that there are editors and then there are journalists, as if an editor isn't also a journalist. But for a change I digress..]

There’s a certain old school of thought that it’s the conductor vs. the orchestra, and it comes from the time when conductors were all-powerful dictators on the podium. (I’ve never known that time.) But in truth the best conductors are collaborators with their performers, orchestral or choral or solo). Ultimately decisions are made by the conductor, but not without input. And we get input in a lot of ways, usually not verbal. I might have in mind a solo sung a particular way, and then the soloist shows up and sings it absolutely beautifully and committed and expressive another way, and I probably will gladly accept it. The same is true with the orchestra: I might have had something else in mind but then I like what I am hearing at rehearsal and so I leave it. Or I might change it. Certainly I’ll try to unify it.

One of the things I’ve enjoyed the most here in the capital region is that orchestral players do not fit the (old) stereotype of professionals just interested in earning their paycheck, not respecting choruses, and feeling the conductor is their opponent. The stereotype goes even further: instrumentalists don’t want to know about the pieces, the texts, etc; they just want to know if they should play louder or softer, faster or slower, on or off the string.

In fact, players here want to know a lot about the pieces they are playing and they are genuinely interested not only in sounding as good as possible but in understanding how they fit in to the overall expression of the music. And the ones who know me feel free to offer suggestions in rehearsal that might make something better, clearer, more expressive. They know it’s as collaborative as time allows.

8 Responses

“There are those who, when intending to refer to ‘singers and instrumentalists,’ make the grievous error of saying ‘singers and musicians,’ as if singers are not musicians also.” HALLELUJAH! I’ve held this pet peeve in check for many years. I still remember, probably 15 years ago, a TV newsmagazine doing a profile of the actor Paul Sorvino. In trying to describe him as a Renaissance man, they listed his talents: “He is an actor, director, master chef, singer, and musician”. Drove me nuts.
I also can’t stand advertisements that say the X Symphony Orchestra will be performing “Carmina Burana”, or the Verdi Requiem. That would be a nifty trick for the wind instrumentalists to sing along, too.

This is so hilarious. Musicians have been making sport of singers by means of this distinction for ages — precisely because we know how much it riles you folks. (Ooops,I did it again.)

I’m probably only making things worse, but among the jokes about conductors were some choice ones about those who preferred to use all three names, which is not the only affinity they have with some notorious serial killers. (Now David, yours is hyphenated and technically counts as two, so come down off the ceiling. But that other David that leads the local band of musicians, well, I believe the shoe fits…

PS – my hyphenated name resulted from my taking my wife’s family name as a part of mine. It was – and is – a political statement, especially as she hasn’t really hyphenated hers. Her legal name, and what everyone knows her as, is Paige Griggs. Yet oddly her first-grade students call her Mrs. J. We don’t know why!

Hi David,
This is the second blog post I’ve see this week arguing for a collaborative rather than dictatorial relationship between conductor and ensemble. (The other one is Choralgirl’s post at: http://choralreef.blogspot.com/2009/03/little-girly-gesture-language.html)
I wonder how long it will take for the stereotypes of conductors actually to catch up with how conductors are saying we like to work!
liz

Hi, David–one of my commenters directed me to this post…may I just say, “AMEN, Brother!” Especially that you only get to be a dictator if you’re as good as Toscanini. And the “singers and musicians” thing is a peeve of mine, as well.

Regarding the false distinction between “singers” and “musicians” (the latter term used by some to mean “instrumentalists”) — well, don’t forget those of us singers who also play instruments. I got my start in elementary school band and played E-flat clarinet all the way through college even though I was a voice (and theory!) major. I think of myself as a musician; my instrment is voice.